Talk:Nitrogen/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Returning for another GA review after Cu and Pd. I'm sorry to say that this article is quite far from GA at the moment due to citation and images issues. It's not such a bad fail, though - most of the rest is fine - so feel free to renominate once those issues have been addressed. Lanthanum-138 (talk) 09:11, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Review
[edit]GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it reasonably well written?
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. References to sources:
- See 2B.
- B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
- Unfortunately, there is a serious lack of references. E.g. applications of nitrogen compounds, compounds and a lot of paragraphs are not cited at all. For a good article nominee, this seems quite unacceptable.
- C. No original research:
- I don't know whether the uncited paragraphs are original research.
- A. References to sources:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused:
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- No edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
- I would think that there need to be a few more images.
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
Thanks, --Lanthanum-138 (talk) 09:11, 7 August 2011 (UTC)